ArticleMaternal and child health journal2019
Exploring Human Resource Managers' Decision-Making Process for Workplace Breastfeeding-Support Benefits Following the Passage of the Affordable Care Act.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breastfeeding support for Australian hospital employees: a qualitative study.International breastfeeding journal · 2026Article
- Understanding lactation policies and resources across a university system: survey and document review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Work-Related Factors Affecting Exclusive Breastfeeding Among Employed Women in Ethiopia: Managers' Perspective Using a Qualitative Approach.International journal of women's health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives To explore factors that shape decisions made regarding employee benefits and compare the decision-making process for workplace breastfeeding support to that of other benefits. Methods Sixteen semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with Human Resource Managers (HRMs) who had previously participated in a breastfeeding-support survey. A priori codes were used, which were based on a theoretical model informed by organizational behavior theories, followed by grounded codes from emergent themes. Results The major themes that emerged from analysis of the interviews included: (1) HRMs' primary concern was meeting the needs of their employees, regardless of type of benefit; (2) offering general benefits standard for the majority of employees (e.g. health insurance) was viewed as essential to recruitment and retention, whereas breastfeeding benefits were viewed as discretionary; (3) providing additional breastfeeding supports (versus only the supports mandated by the Affordable Care Act) was strongly influenced by HRMs' perception of employee need. Conclusions for Practice Advocates for improved workplace breastfeeding-support benefits should focus on HRMs' perception of employee need. To achieve this, advocates could encourage HRMs to perform objective breastfeeding-support needs assessments and highlight how breastfeeding support benefits all employees (e.g., reduced absenteeism and enhanced productivity of breastfeeding employee). Additionally, framing breastfeeding-support benefits in terms of their impact on recruitment and retention could be effective in improving adoption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.